In supporting Prop. 133's sales tax increase to purportedly bring about "safe streets" (Oct. 18), The Times forgets a major factor in what it admits to be a "regressive tax." By reducing the purchasing power of the low- and middle-income groups and placing an additional burden on business, such a regressive tax increases the poverty and business stagnation that cause so much crime. It is impossible to reduce crime and illegal drug distribution when an inequitable tax system makes it so much easier to survive economically by selling drugs than by obtaining honest employment and paying the high prices resulting from consumer taxes.

One of the largest public employee unions at Los Angeles City Hall handed a potentially costly setback to a plan for a new half-cent sales tax, announcing Friday that its political advisory board opposes the measure. Service Employees International Union Local 721's political education committee recommended unanimously Thursday night that the group take a position against the tax, which is backed by City Council President Herb Wesson for the March 5 ballot. The council's final vote on that tax is slated for next week.

We currently have a "flat" tax for Social Security and a "progressive" tax for income. Page 5 of form 1040 for 1990 shows us that the "flat" tax of 15.1% raised $375.5 billion and the "progressive" tax ranging from 15% to 31% raised $463.1 billion. Had Social Security been applied to all wages instead of only to wages under $53,400 (a regressive tax if there ever was one), then a "flat" rate of 15% would have raised as much revenue as a "progressive" rate that starts at 15%. Anyone with math facility can see, in aggregate, our current system gives the appearance of being progressive with the reality of being regressive.

Nick Franco squinted across Morro Bay to the potential future of the California state parks system. The district superintendent of this coastal jewel, Franco ticked off money-making possibilities: Install gates and charge to get in the parking lot. Sell off the nearby county-run golf course. In the marina, bring in more concessions. Outsource to allow motorized recreation in the wetlands. And in the wild, undulating spine of sand dunes at Montaña de Oro State Park, he could foresee a string of profitable billboards facing beachgoers on the opposite shore.

Jack M. Tuell's column (commentary, May 19) points out convincingly the damage being perpetrated upon California's citizenry by the state lottery. We need to be reminded again that: - The lottery is a regressive tax on the poor, often robbing families of the necessities of life. - Schools obtain only a minuscule percentage of their budgets from lottery support. - Promotional publicity for the lottery is misleading since it emphasizes the drama of winning, playing down the overwhelming odds against any windfall.

Once again the voters of San Diego County are being asked to increase their taxes because their elected officials are not capable of doing the job they were elected to do, run the county government within budget. We are being asked for the second time in 12 months to again raise the sales tax by an additional one-half percent. Maybe half a percent does not seem like much to the vested-interest people of San Diego, and the people they manage to put into public office. But to those of us in the low- to middle-income groups, the sales tax is the most regressive tax possible.

Re "Mayor seeks to put phone tax on ballot," Oct. 2 Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's effort to preserve the utility users tax on consumer phone bills is regretfully misguided. This regressive tax is nothing more than a government cash cow that has only facilitated wasteful spending at City Hall. According to a key policy study released this summer by the San Diego Institute for Policy Research, more than 140 utility user taxes in California rake in more than $1.

Re "DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile," Nov. 16: Charging people by the mile in lieu of an existing gasoline tax rewards the wasting of valuable resources and perpetuates our reliance on fossil fuels; worse, it dangerously postpones the needed changes in our energy policies. And, speaking relatively, that is the good news. My greatest concern is that we (the people) would give any intelligent consideration to personal mileage tracking systems. There are serious civil rights concerns here: It is not much of a leap from tracking how many miles we drive to where we drive.

Re "Students Protest Tuition Hikes at Capitol Rally," March 16: As the bottom of California's college hierarchy, community colleges always get the short end of the stick. The governor proposes to divert 7,400 University of California and Cal State admits into our already crowded system. Perhaps the governor should join us during the first week of every semester as we pack into already congested classrooms with the high hopes that we will be added to the full class roster because it is a class we really, really need in order to transfer within two years.

One of the largest public employee unions at Los Angeles City Hall handed a potentially costly setback to a plan for a new half-cent sales tax, announcing Friday that its political advisory board opposes the measure. Service Employees International Union Local 721's political education committee recommended unanimously Thursday night that the group take a position against the tax, which is backed by City Council President Herb Wesson for the March 5 ballot. The council's final vote on that tax is slated for next week.

It may not have been foremost in the minds of Californians as they completed their tax forms over the last several weeks, but the state has a progressive income tax system, meaning that the marginal tax rate increases as taxable income increases. Everyone is assessed 1% on the first $7,168 of taxable income, then progressively higher rates through six levels of income, up to 9.3% on taxable income over $47,056.

Re "Mayor seeks to put phone tax on ballot," Oct. 2 Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's effort to preserve the utility users tax on consumer phone bills is regretfully misguided. This regressive tax is nothing more than a government cash cow that has only facilitated wasteful spending at City Hall. According to a key policy study released this summer by the San Diego Institute for Policy Research, more than 140 utility user taxes in California rake in more than $1.

Re "DMV Chief Backs Tax by Mile," Nov. 16: Charging people by the mile in lieu of an existing gasoline tax rewards the wasting of valuable resources and perpetuates our reliance on fossil fuels; worse, it dangerously postpones the needed changes in our energy policies. And, speaking relatively, that is the good news. My greatest concern is that we (the people) would give any intelligent consideration to personal mileage tracking systems. There are serious civil rights concerns here: It is not much of a leap from tracking how many miles we drive to where we drive.

Re "Students Protest Tuition Hikes at Capitol Rally," March 16: As the bottom of California's college hierarchy, community colleges always get the short end of the stick. The governor proposes to divert 7,400 University of California and Cal State admits into our already crowded system. Perhaps the governor should join us during the first week of every semester as we pack into already congested classrooms with the high hopes that we will be added to the full class roster because it is a class we really, really need in order to transfer within two years.

We currently have a "flat" tax for Social Security and a "progressive" tax for income. Page 5 of form 1040 for 1990 shows us that the "flat" tax of 15.1% raised $375.5 billion and the "progressive" tax ranging from 15% to 31% raised $463.1 billion. Had Social Security been applied to all wages instead of only to wages under $53,400 (a regressive tax if there ever was one), then a "flat" rate of 15% would have raised as much revenue as a "progressive" rate that starts at 15%. Anyone with math facility can see, in aggregate, our current system gives the appearance of being progressive with the reality of being regressive.

In supporting Prop. 133's sales tax increase to purportedly bring about "safe streets" (Oct. 18), The Times forgets a major factor in what it admits to be a "regressive tax." By reducing the purchasing power of the low- and middle-income groups and placing an additional burden on business, such a regressive tax increases the poverty and business stagnation that cause so much crime. It is impossible to reduce crime and illegal drug distribution when an inequitable tax system makes it so much easier to survive economically by selling drugs than by obtaining honest employment and paying the high prices resulting from consumer taxes.

July 29, 1986 | DON R. CONLAN, Don R. Conlan is president of Capital Strategy Research Inc. in Los Angeles. He was chief economist for the Cost of Living Council during the Nixon Administration

I have been thinking a lot lately about the pending tax reform legislation. It seems to be an unquestioned article of faith that this legislation is much needed, that everyone is in favor of it and that it will work wonders. Perhaps, but at the risk of extreme unpopularity, I think someone at least should be asking a few questions. First, I wonder why we are back cutting individual income taxes again when we have little or no proof that the last round of tax cuts produced the advertised results?

Legislation that would make closed-captioning technology a required part of most new televisions sold in America is winning support in and out of Congress. That's good news for the estimated 24 million deaf or hearing-impaired U.S. citizens, who now must rely on costly closed-caption decoding devices or, as is more common, view their favorite programs hearing only muted mumbles or nothing at all.

Jack M. Tuell's column (commentary, May 19) points out convincingly the damage being perpetrated upon California's citizenry by the state lottery. We need to be reminded again that: - The lottery is a regressive tax on the poor, often robbing families of the necessities of life. - Schools obtain only a minuscule percentage of their budgets from lottery support. - Promotional publicity for the lottery is misleading since it emphasizes the drama of winning, playing down the overwhelming odds against any windfall.

Legislation that would make closed-captioning technology a required part of most new televisions sold in America is winning support in and out of Congress. That's good news for the estimated 24 million deaf or hearing-impaired U.S. citizens, who now must rely on costly closed-caption decoding devices or, as is more common, view their favorite programs hearing only muted mumbles or nothing at all.